Sreejith vs State Of Kerala on 1 September, 2015
21. The gist of the above discussion is that there is black
and white difference between the schemes of Section 24 of the
M.F.A.No.88 OF 2015
27
CPC and Sec.407 of the Cr.P.C. . The decision rendered by the
Full Bench in 2005(4)KLT 865 holding that appeal is
maintainable under Section 5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act in
respect of an order passed by a learned single Judge, invoking
power under Section 24 CPC differs much from similar order
passed by a single Judge invoking the power under Section 407
of the Cr.P.C. and as such, the said decision is not applicable to
the case in hand. On the other hand, the non-availability of any
such right of appeal under Section 5(i) of the High Court Act in
relation to an order passed under different provisions of the
Cr.P.C. stands asserted and declared by different Division
Benches of this Court cited herein before. We are also of the
same view and we hold that the power exercised by the Single
Judge refusing to transfer the cases from one Magistrate's Court
to another Magistrate's Court, in exercise of the power under
Section 407 Cr.P.C., is not appealable under Section 5(i) of the
Kerala High Court Act. Thus, the question on maintainability of
M.F.A.No.88 OF 2015
28
the present appeal stands answered against the appellants.